Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Jan 4th 2012 12:57PM It's amazing to me how many people despise freedom. If there were no market for ivory, then a law wouldn't be needed. Because there is a market, a law is useless. If it's mine, then I decide what to do with it. One country doen't want to export ivory, one does. We can violate one or the other's rights, or we can let them decide for themselves.
Mar 16th 2011 9:17AM Here's an idea: Let the trainer decide if he wants to get into the water with an orca. We can also let the public decide if they want to see one of the shows. Try freedom, it usually works.
Mar 14th 2011 3:48PM Since the tsunami is the event driving the plot, yes they are.
Mar 14th 2011 12:47PM Yes indeed, pulling this movie will sure help repair the damage caused by the earthquake and tsunami. A better idea would be to let the people of Japan decide if they want to watch the movie. The ticket sales would be an excellent indicator of whether or not the movie was appropriate.
Mar 9th 2011 5:19PM An even better idea for these people: Encourage parents to raise their children.
Jan 11th 2011 5:38PM It doesn't matter why the Beamer's face looks like it does. While this isn't a comment that I would have made, I damn sure wouldn't have apologized for it. These over sensitive jerks need to lighten up. Frank is a big boy now and he can take care of himself.
Jan 11th 2011 9:29AM One ticket fee forces people who do not use a service to pay for those who do. Why should you, who are flying with no bags, pay for my four? Why should I, who bought my ticket online and checked in from home, pay a check in person at the airport.
What people don't realize is that breaking these fees up actually saves people money by holding those who use a service responsible for paying for that service.
Jan 8th 2011 10:44AM As we say in the construction business, "Read your contract". These people bought their condo knowing that pets were not allowed. They violated the terms of the contract that they signed of their own free will. They are now responsible for their actions. The basis of contract law is that one party cannot unilaterally change the terms of a contract. This would be the same as you buying a car for $ 500.00 per month, then the finance company changing the payments to $700.00 per month without asking you and repossessing the car when you rightfully keep the original terms of the finance agreement.
These people will not have to pay these fines after they sue the lawyer for malpractice. Pro-bono or not, this lawyer had a duty to file all forms and notify his clients in a timely manner.
Jan 6th 2011 2:35PM You're gay? Who cares? What's up with the Sox next season?